Can Atheists and Theists co-exist?

I am new to TA but the question I pose is certainly not a fresh one: Can Atheists and Theists co-exist?

We all know that historically Theists and other Theists cannot co-exist peacefully. War and violence in the name of Religion has been widespread over the entirety of human existence, but it has to be said that civility between believers and non-believers in the modern age has been commonplace. Formal (mostly amicable) debates and the agreement on separation of church and state have somewhat proven this theory, right?

Do the majority of Atheists really strive for a world of empty churches, bible burning and the end of religion forever? Maybe some of us do, just as many Theists probably pray for the conversion of all Atheists to Theism.

What can we realistically hope to achieve as Atheists, and in your opinion is it possible to co-exist with the believers?

I'll leave you with some interesting quotes -

“The whole war between the atheist and the theist comes down to this: the atheist believes a 'what' created the universe; the theist believes a 'who' created the universe.” - Criss Jami

"I'm noticing an exciting trend around the country: a resurgence of interest in Christian apologetics (the defense of the faith). This is a reaction to the current attacks on the essentials of Christianity that are coming from militant atheists, radical professors, and Internet gadflies."

- Lee Strobel

"I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world."

- Richard Dawkins

"Religion is part of the human make-up. It's also part of our cultural and intellectual history. Religion was our first attempt at literature, the texts, our first attempt at cosmology, making sense of where we are in the universe, our first attempt at health care, believing in faith healing, our first attempt at philosophy."

I had this same reaction on a date once. The gal asked if I would like to go to church with her, I said yes. I arrived a little late, but she meet me at the front of the church. I noticed that someone was speaking in tounges! This was very hard for me to take, but I sat down with her, all the time trying very hard to hold a screaming giggle down. Sadly, it was a little too obvious....

I don't know where to post this, that it won't be considered off-topic, but I guess this topic comes as close as I'll get. The Secular Coalition for America - https://secular.org/ - does a great job and with the support of atheists and secularists, and humanists like us, has grown both in size and influence over the past ten years. Coming up soon (DEC. 12) there may be an opportunity to tell Congress that churches they need to pay taxes. I suggest that any interested check this organization out, then join and support, or not, as you wish.

Secular Coalition Prepares for Tax Reform Summit

The Secular Coalition celebrated 10 years this month, and with that milestone are indications of just how far we have come as an organization and as a movement. This week the Secular Coalition attended two White House events--including a meeting of the President's Advisory Council for Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships--as well as having confirmed three meetings with U.S. House offices for next week. This week we also announced another big milestone: reaching 100 Endorsing Organizations. Our coalition is getting stronger by the day. But there's still a lot to be done. Next year Congress will be focused on tax reform. In preparation, the Secular Coalition, with support from 11 organizations, is holding a summit on December 12th at 2:00pm EST, "Correcting Religious Privileging in the Tax Code." An independent study published in "Free Inquiry" earlier this year found that religious privileging costs U.S. taxpayers $71 billion every year. At the summit we will discuss and develop concerted strategies to address and correct disparities in the U.S. tax code that privilege churches over other charitable organizations. Join us by phone (530-881-1400 Code: 703905) or at the office more information here.

This is much more On Topic than most of your hijacks. (Why are you so allergic to starting topics? This deserves it's own.)

This is a noble effort, but I wouldn't expect it to succeed the first time... but it's one to try over and over and maybe see some success with 20 or 30 years down the road, particularly as the younger "none"-heavy generation gets older. But it's important to remember that even many of the "nones" probably think churches as a whole do more good than harm, even if they are aware of a lot of specific cases of "bad church, bad, bad church!" (read that in the same voice you'd use to scold a dog).

RE: "(Why are you so allergic to starting topics?)" - I suppose it could have something to do with the fact that I started three topics in the past, which were ignored in droves - what's the old saw about, "third time's the charm"?

I agree that it will likely take many efforts, but every journey begins with the first step.

Five topics at a time show up on the board, none of mine ever did - clearly few can respond to topics they don't know exist. It would appear that the powers that be, decided mine weren't worthy of exhibition, and after a day or two, I deleted them. Now, I just respond to the topics of others. I hope that answers your question.

There have been times, many times, when I have seen your effusive countenance on two out of five topics - while I certainly don't begrudge your day in the sun (you could certainly use the vitamin D), I felt my own had as much merit as yours. Four may be the charm for some less discriminating - three is enough for me.

Not sour grapes, just good wine --

(BTW - speaking of wine, I have been criticized for spelling "merlot," "merlo" - what my critics fail to realize, is not only is the "t" in merlo silent, it is also invisible --)

There's also the remote possibility that I reached for the "t" key, and missed --

I must not have been online when three of my extremely captivating topics were among the five. I can remember a time when there were two. Anyway you and I don't decide which topics abide in the five, the AT users do.

First you may have neglected to notice that I edited my comment to read two, rather than three. Secondly, the site is TA, not AT, and lastly, the users can't comment on that which they cannot see, ergo, the moderators decide which topics "abide" in the fab five. But other than that, you're absolutely right! Except for the "captivating" part --